Seeing the Browns get screwed out of RG3 and about to possibly be screwed out of Trent Richardson..really has me reconsidering this.

The idea that the Browns could have had their chance at bidding at Luck, RG3, instead of sitting on their hands, and praying that they can outsuck other teams, or have to trade the entire draft for the next 10 years is sort of lame if you think about it.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Seeing the Browns get screwed out of RG3 and about to possibly be screwed out of Trent Richardson..really has me reconsidering this.

The idea that the Browns could have had their chance at bidding at Luck, RG3, instead of sitting on their hands, and praying that they can outsuck other teams, or have to trade the entire draft for the next 10 years is sort of lame if you think about it.

They did bid on him. They used picks as currency. They lost. Besides an auction essentially turns the NFL into MLB and in that scenario the Borwns still lose out to the Skins and Snyder for RGIII who lost out to Paul Allen for the services of Luck.

But the article was from 2010 and the NFL addressed the worst part of the draft by setting the rookie wage scale. So now the poor get more talent without as much burden which theoretically should allow them to get better.

There would be a cap of some sorts depending on how bad you've been the previous season.

IE, the Colts would be give 15 million, Rams 14.75, Vikes 14.5, Browns 14.25, etc. Money could be slightly skewed there..perhaps, again, there's a certain amount of cash allotted towards every round, and if you don't want to nab an elite player, you can just wait a round or so, and spend like mad.

The Browns would have the right to spend as much cash as they'd so desire. In this case, if they want RG3? They could go all in, and beat the skins in that scenario. There's no way the Rams can trade their allotted cash, nor anyone else. they're stuck. It allows a lot of franchises to be flexible as well. Perhaps the Colts don't want to go and get Luck? Maybe they feel that doing some sort package with Tannehill and a few skill players is the way to go. They are more than welcome to do that.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

There would be a cap of some sorts depending on how bad you've been the previous season.

IE, the Colts would be give 15 million, Rams 14.75, Vikes 14.5, Browns 14.25, etc. Money could be slightly skewed there..perhaps, again, there's a certain amount of cash allotted towards every round, and if you don't want to nab an elite player, you can just wait a round or so, and spend like mad.

The Browns would have the right to spend as much cash as they'd so desire. In this case, if they want RG3? They could go all in, and beat the skins in that scenario. There's no way the Rams can trade their allotted cash, nor anyone else. they're stuck. It allows a lot of franchises to be flexible as well. Perhaps the Colts don't want to go and get luck. They can invest in a couple of picks that'd be considered lower in the 2nd round.

pup wrote:Couldn't the Rams bid for RG3 and trade the player to Washington?

Perhaps a trade clause is put in for that? the player that you draft, cannot be traded until week 8?

EDIT: More importantly, there's no way the Rams could trade him for cash aka the draft picks in this scenario, there's no "Have our auction cap in 2013, 2014" sort of deal, they'd have to do it purely from players to player. and I'm not sure theres anyone on the 'Skins worth making a deal for.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

So the Colts would have the most in this draft no matter what. Meaning that if they did want Luck they would need to bid off of their allotment. Because certainly the Skins would have bid all of theirs (they had no problem giving away the equivalant of their entire draft).

Which means the Colts would 'win' and would then have no additional players.

This would seem to be less fair to the worst team then the existing system and arguably less fair than the system in place in 2010.

It would be awesome if they let teams keep their unspent allotment and cash it in. Then Mike Brown would never let his staff draft anyone.